Tim Polasek

[Expat_Poke]

If he has one or two good years, he's gone to a p5 team again.

Or maybe Bohl hangs it up and he becomes Wyoming's head coach. Bohl won't be coaching very many more years. Vigen was slated to be the guy in waiting but it became apparent that he had very little chance for that (so he went to Montana State and Bohl did not have to part ways with his friend).

Even if that were to happen...the overall perceived talent on the Wyoming coaching staff will not increase or even stay steady as long as we have a successful season or seasons. If he's great...It will be noticed and he'll get poached.

Steady program improvement seems pretty impossible given that improvement past a certain point results in a talent exodus from the staff which will stall or reverse the improvement.

I want to be be more excited about the program but I just don't see a realistic path to sustained success. It seems like the best we can hope for is a spike of success...and that spike seems to be not very high anymore.

Look at how long Alabama tends to keep their coordinators and position coaches. It isn't long. This is the current stage of the game. If you have a good-great coordinator or position coach they are likely to be poached. Doesn't matter if you are big or little in the case of position coaches and coordinators there is always a bigger fish. The difference is in head coaches, if Wyoming got a younger great head coach they are more than likely to be poached, top programs not so much. Though even with top programs, you never know if the NFL comes a calling. It is why your ability to repeatedly hire good coaches is so important.

In short, Wyoming would be in a better position even if Polasek knocks it out of the park and gets poached within two years provided he helps establish some winning culture on the offensive side of the ball. Should that happen, then it is time to make another good OC hire.

 

[307bball]

If he has one or two good years, he's gone to a p5 team again.

Or maybe Bohl hangs it up and he becomes Wyoming's head coach. Bohl won't be coaching very many more years. Vigen was slated to be the guy in waiting but it became apparent that he had very little chance for that (so he went to Montana State and Bohl did not have to part ways with his friend).

Even if that were to happen...the overall perceived talent on the Wyoming coaching staff will not increase or even stay steady as long as we have a successful season or seasons. If he's great...It will be noticed and he'll get poached.

Steady program improvement seems pretty impossible given that improvement past a certain point results in a talent exodus from the staff which will stall or reverse the improvement.

I want to be be more excited about the program but I just don't see a realistic path to sustained success. It seems like the best we can hope for is a spike of success...and that spike seems to be not very high anymore.

Look at how long Alabama tends to keep their coordinators and position coaches. It isn't long. This is the current stage of the game. If you have a good-great coordinator or position coach they are likely to be poached. Doesn't matter if you are big or little in the case of position coaches and coordinators there is always a bigger fish. The difference is in head coaches, if Wyoming got a younger great head coach they are more than likely to be poached, top programs not so much. Though even with top programs, you never know if the NFL comes a calling. It is why your ability to repeatedly hire good coaches is so important.

In short, Wyoming would be in a better position even if Polasek knocks it out of the park and gets poached within two years provided he helps establish some winning culture on the offensive side of the ball. Should that happen, then it is time to make another good OC hire.

I agree that the length of time that a particular coordinator or position coach stays anywhere seems to be going down across the board. The problem is that duration of tenure doesn't capture the issue that i'm speaking to. There is a huge difference in compensation at the same position (comparing OC to OC for instance) from say...Montana St to Wyoming to Iowa to Alabama. Talent will always go up that chain. It does not matter If Alabama loses a coordinator or positing coach because the best ones in the world are waiting in the wings! Now...imagine the pokes get a great coordinator, as soon as it gets recognized he's gone. Maybe we have a good HC at the time and can get a replacement that is good but that merely perpetuates the cycle.

I'm guessing Polasek is great...I have no reason to think otherwise. But I'm 99.99% sure that the problems in generating sustained success at Wyoming won't be helped by hiring another quality coordinator to have them get hired away in 18 months.

 

[DVDA]

This is exciting to see. I have a feeling Vigen was pushed to pursue other opportunities as a way to save face rather than being fired. It's going to be difficult for Polasek to be worse than Vigen has been at UW. Hopefully a fresh outlook on offense helps make the offense respectable at least.

 

[LanderPoke]

This is exciting to see. I have a feeling Vigen was pushed to pursue other opportunities as a way to save face rather than being fired. It's going to be difficult for Polasek to be worse than Vigen has been at UW. Hopefully a fresh outlook on offense helps make the offense respectable at least.

Yes. It can't get any worse! Only better.

I didn't mean to come off as a pessimist. This is a great time to be a Pokes football fan. Optimism should be plentiful. After all, we're rid of Vigen. yippee!

 

[Expat_Poke]

I agree that the length of time that a particular coordinator or position coach stays anywhere seems to be going down across the board. The problem is that duration of tenure doesn't capture the issue that i'm speaking to. There is a huge difference in compensation at the same position (comparing OC to OC for instance) from say...Montana St to Wyoming to Iowa to Alabama. Talent will always go up that chain. It does not matter If Alabama loses a coordinator or positing coach because the best ones in the world are waiting in the wings! Now...imagine the pokes get a great coordinator, as soon as it gets recognized he's gone. Maybe we have a good HC at the time and can get a replacement that is good but that merely perpetuates the cycle.

I'm guessing Polasek is great...I have no reason to think otherwise. But I'm 99.99% sure that the problems in generating sustained success at Wyoming won't be helped by hiring another quality coordinator to have them get hired away in 18 months.

I understand the coaching turnover makes it difficult, but it makes it difficult for every program relative to their tier. Moving your program up tier requires long term sustained success, and that includes being able to hire good coaches.

Don't kid yourself those hires do matter for the Clemsons, Bamas, LSU's. There are more than a couple of programs who were riding high, then had coordinators poached and the replacements just didn't cut it. We will see how LSU does with the loss of their DC from 2019 as Pelini was not the answer (yes they lost a lot of player talent, there are a lot of moving pieces of course). Even for your blue bloods making the wrong DC/OC hire can contribute to starting a downward trend making them mediocre to bottom dwelling programs in their conference. It is a brutal competitive game. If you want to sustain success, you have to be able to continuously hire good coaches and coordinators to maintain a positive long term trend. The idea is to try to avoid perpetuating a cycle and rather establish and maintain a winning culture that makes your program attractive to qualified and good candidates (in addition to attracting money, recruits). You may have some ups and downs but you want that long term upward trend. Does it help having to deal with this, no, but you have to deal with it or else down into the bottom of the conference you go.

What is your solution to this situation?

 

['PokeForLife]

If he has one or two good years, he's gone to a p5 team again.

Or maybe Bohl hangs it up and he becomes Wyoming's head coach. Bohl won't be coaching very many more years. Vigen was slated to be the guy in waiting but it became apparent that he had very little chance for that (so he went to Montana State and Bohl did not have to part ways with his friend).

Even if that were to happen...the overall perceived talent on the Wyoming coaching staff will not increase or even stay steady as long as we have a successful season or seasons. If he's great...It will be noticed and he'll get poached.

Steady program improvement seems pretty impossible given that improvement past a certain point results in a talent exodus from the staff which will stall or reverse the improvement.

I want to be be more excited about the program but I just don't see a realistic path to sustained success. It seems like the best we can hope for is a spike of success...and that spike seems to be not very high anymore.

Look at how long Alabama tends to keep their coordinators and position coaches. It isn't long. This is the current stage of the game. If you have a good-great coordinator or position coach they are likely to be poached. Doesn't matter if you are big or little in the case of position coaches and coordinators there is always a bigger fish. The difference is in head coaches, if Wyoming got a younger great head coach they are more than likely to be poached, top programs not so much. Though even with top programs, you never know if the NFL comes a calling. It is why your ability to repeatedly hire good coaches is so important.

In short, Wyoming would be in a better position even if Polasek knocks it out of the park and gets poached within two years provided he helps establish some winning culture on the offensive side of the ball. Should that happen, then it is time to make another good OC hire.

I agree that the length of time that a particular coordinator or position coach stays anywhere seems to be going down across the board. The problem is that duration of tenure doesn't capture the issue that i'm speaking to. There is a huge difference in compensation at the same position (comparing OC to OC for instance) from say...Montana St to Wyoming to Iowa to Alabama. Talent will always go up that chain. It does not matter If Alabama loses a coordinator or positing coach because the best ones in the world are waiting in the wings! Now...imagine the pokes get a great coordinator, as soon as it gets recognized he's gone. Maybe we have a good HC at the time and can get a replacement that is good but that merely perpetuates the cycle.

I'm guessing Polasek is great...I have no reason to think otherwise. But I'm 99.99% sure that the problems in generating sustained success at Wyoming won't be helped by hiring another quality coordinator to have them get hired away in 18 months.

This was my point, but too lazy to spell out in so many words. A young guy will leave with the first prospect of either higher salary or percieved prestige.

 

[307bball]

I agree that the length of time that a particular coordinator or position coach stays anywhere seems to be going down across the board. The problem is that duration of tenure doesn't capture the issue that i'm speaking to. There is a huge difference in compensation at the same position (comparing OC to OC for instance) from say...Montana St to Wyoming to Iowa to Alabama. Talent will always go up that chain. It does not matter If Alabama loses a coordinator or positing coach because the best ones in the world are waiting in the wings! Now...imagine the pokes get a great coordinator, as soon as it gets recognized he's gone. Maybe we have a good HC at the time and can get a replacement that is good but that merely perpetuates the cycle.

I'm guessing Polasek is great...I have no reason to think otherwise. But I'm 99.99% sure that the problems in generating sustained success at Wyoming won't be helped by hiring another quality coordinator to have them get hired away in 18 months.

I understand the coaching turnover makes it difficult, but it makes it difficult for every program relative to their tier. Moving your program up tier requires long term sustained success, and that includes being able to hire good coaches.

Don't kid yourself those hires do matter for the Clemsons, Bamas, LSU's. There are more than a couple of programs who were riding high, then had coordinators poached and the replacements just didn't cut it. We will see how LSU does with the loss of their DC from 2019 as Pelini was not the answer (yes they lost a lot of player talent, there are a lot of moving pieces of course). Even for your blue bloods making the wrong DC/OC hire can contribute to starting a downward trend making them mediocre to bottom dwelling programs in their conference. It is a brutal competitive game. If you want to sustain success, you have to be able to continuously hire good coaches and coordinators to maintain a positive long term trend. The idea is to try to avoid perpetuating a cycle and rather establish and maintain a winning culture that makes your program attractive to qualified and good candidates (in addition to attracting money, recruits). You may have some ups and downs but you want that long term upward trend. Does it help having to deal with this, no, but you have to deal with it or else down into the bottom of the conference you go.

What is your solution to this situation?

First...great response...everything you said makes a lot of sense.

I'll be honest.....I don't have a solution, that is why I'm asking this question. I have followed the pokes like it was my religion all of my adult life. I no longer believe that the main reason that we have floundered competitively (especially this century) is because the coaches have been no good. In football specifically, I think Glenn, DC and Bohl are all "good" coaches. Outside of a couple individual years, the results have not been what most of us want.

The one area that I think your are missing is the difference in a coaching vacancy at different levels. It is very different to have an coach leave from a top flight program vs from a random non power conference program. I agree that both of them represent a challenge to the people trying to fill the gap but for every bad hire at the top you will have 10 times that many bad hires at the bottom. The inverse is true for good hires. This speaks to the winning "culture" that you referred to. Some programs have "it" and some don't ..... based on the last 20 years...Wyoming is unfortunately in the don't have "it" category. If all you did for the last 50 years of college football is predict wins based on the previous three year trend you would be shockingly accurate. I think competitive mobility in college football is really rare.

I died hard cheering on the brown and gold for the last 35+ years....I'm at the point now that I just don't want them to be terrible...I know there are those on this board that say it's "championships or failure"...that used to be me. I'll take a championship...and I'll love it when/if it happens, but I have really enjoyed watching the pokes during Bohl's time here. I hope we don't dip into the crud tier again like we seem to do every 5 years or so.

 

[OrediggerPoke]

If he has one or two good years, he's gone to a p5 team again.

Or maybe Bohl hangs it up and he becomes Wyoming's head coach. Bohl won't be coaching very many more years. Vigen was slated to be the guy in waiting but it became apparent that he had very little chance for that (so he went to Montana State and Bohl did not have to part ways with his friend).

Even if that were to happen...the overall perceived talent on the Wyoming coaching staff will not increase or even stay steady as long as we have a successful season or seasons. If he's great...It will be noticed and he'll get poached.

Steady program improvement seems pretty impossible given that improvement past a certain point results in a talent exodus from the staff which will stall or reverse the improvement.

I want to be be more excited about the program but I just don't see a realistic path to sustained success. It seems like the best we can hope for is a spike of success...and that spike seems to be not very high anymore.

I'll be happy if other programs want our coaches. It will mean that we didn't suck. Wyoming (just the same as every other G5 program) is never going to be able to retain successful coaches. The key is to continually bring in young coaches so they are ready to step up and fill the void when other coaches are poached.

 

[307bball]

If he has one or two good years, he's gone to a p5 team again.

Or maybe Bohl hangs it up and he becomes Wyoming's head coach. Bohl won't be coaching very many more years. Vigen was slated to be the guy in waiting but it became apparent that he had very little chance for that (so he went to Montana State and Bohl did not have to part ways with his friend).

Even if that were to happen...the overall perceived talent on the Wyoming coaching staff will not increase or even stay steady as long as we have a successful season or seasons. If he's great...It will be noticed and he'll get poached.

Steady program improvement seems pretty impossible given that improvement past a certain point results in a talent exodus from the staff which will stall or reverse the improvement.

I want to be be more excited about the program but I just don't see a realistic path to sustained success. It seems like the best we can hope for is a spike of success...and that spike seems to be not very high anymore.

I'll be happy if other programs want our coaches. It will mean that we didn't suck. Wyoming (just the same as every other G5 program) is never going to be able to retain successful coaches. The key is to continually bring in young coaches so they are ready to step up and fill the void when other coaches are poached.

You are right...it means we didn't suck. However...In the history of success at Wyoming it also means that we are going to suck. Success has not been built upon at Wyoming. This is actually typical of non-power college football programs. Whatever success that gets incrementally built is squandered with the next regime. You can probably find exceptions to that in Wyoming's history but what I'm describing is waaaaay more prevalent.

 

[OrediggerPoke]

If he has one or two good years, he's gone to a p5 team again.

Or maybe Bohl hangs it up and he becomes Wyoming's head coach. Bohl won't be coaching very many more years. Vigen was slated to be the guy in waiting but it became apparent that he had very little chance for that (so he went to Montana State and Bohl did not have to part ways with his friend).

Even if that were to happen...the overall perceived talent on the Wyoming coaching staff will not increase or even stay steady as long as we have a successful season or seasons. If he's great...It will be noticed and he'll get poached.

Steady program improvement seems pretty impossible given that improvement past a certain point results in a talent exodus from the staff which will stall or reverse the improvement.

I want to be be more excited about the program but I just don't see a realistic path to sustained success. It seems like the best we can hope for is a spike of success...and that spike seems to be not very high anymore.

I'll be happy if other programs want our coaches. It will mean that we didn't suck. Wyoming (just the same as every other G5 program) is never going to be able to retain successful coaches. The key is to continually bring in young coaches so they are ready to step up and fill the void when other coaches are poached.

You are right...it means we didn't suck. However...In the history of success at Wyoming it also means that we are going to suck. Success has not been built upon at Wyoming. This is actually typical of non-power college football programs. Whatever success that gets incrementally built is squandered with the next regime. You can probably find exceptions to that in Wyoming's history but what I'm describing is waaaaay more prevalent.

I'm just lost in the argument. If we don't suck, what is the purpose of worrying about sucking in the future. Let's cross that bridge if and when it comes.

 

[307bball]

If he has one or two good years, he's gone to a p5 team again.

Or maybe Bohl hangs it up and he becomes Wyoming's head coach. Bohl won't be coaching very many more years. Vigen was slated to be the guy in waiting but it became apparent that he had very little chance for that (so he went to Montana State and Bohl did not have to part ways with his friend).

Even if that were to happen...the overall perceived talent on the Wyoming coaching staff will not increase or even stay steady as long as we have a successful season or seasons. If he's great...It will be noticed and he'll get poached.

Steady program improvement seems pretty impossible given that improvement past a certain point results in a talent exodus from the staff which will stall or reverse the improvement.

I want to be be more excited about the program but I just don't see a realistic path to sustained success. It seems like the best we can hope for is a spike of success...and that spike seems to be not very high anymore.

I'll be happy if other programs want our coaches. It will mean that we didn't suck. Wyoming (just the same as every other G5 program) is never going to be able to retain successful coaches. The key is to continually bring in young coaches so they are ready to step up and fill the void when other coaches are poached.

You are right...it means we didn't suck. However...In the history of success at Wyoming it also means that we are going to suck. Success has not been built upon at Wyoming. This is actually typical of non-power college football programs. Whatever success that gets incrementally built is squandered with the next regime. You can probably find exceptions to that in Wyoming's history but what I'm describing is waaaaay more prevalent.

I'm just lost in the argument. If we don't suck, what is the purpose of worrying about sucking in the future. Let's cross that bridge if and when it comes.

I'm not really arguing a point... I'm just making the observation that (as you pointed out) when wyoming has had a coach hired away, it is because there has been some success to hire him away from. And then, once that happens, historically, the program has "reverted to the mean" so to speak. I think we all accept that this is the nature of the beast.... And we know that the answer is to make another good hire. But making the next good hire is the product of a process that does not seem to be in place at wyoming....So as much as I enjoy the success that comes before getting our coaches hired away from us....I do not relish what has inevitably come next.

Does that make any sense?

 

[LawPoke]

If he has one or two good years, he's gone to a p5 team again.

Or maybe Bohl hangs it up and he becomes Wyoming's head coach. Bohl won't be coaching very many more years. Vigen was slated to be the guy in waiting but it became apparent that he had very little chance for that (so he went to Montana State and Bohl did not have to part ways with his friend).

Even if that were to happen...the overall perceived talent on the Wyoming coaching staff will not increase or even stay steady as long as we have a successful season or seasons. If he's great...It will be noticed and he'll get poached.

Steady program improvement seems pretty impossible given that improvement past a certain point results in a talent exodus from the staff which will stall or reverse the improvement.

I want to be be more excited about the program but I just don't see a realistic path to sustained success. It seems like the best we can hope for is a spike of success...and that spike seems to be not very high anymore.

I'll be happy if other programs want our coaches. It will mean that we didn't suck. Wyoming (just the same as every other G5 program) is never going to be able to retain successful coaches. The key is to continually bring in young coaches so they are ready to step up and fill the void when other coaches are poached.

You are right...it means we didn't suck. However...In the history of success at Wyoming it also means that we are going to suck. Success has not been built upon at Wyoming. This is actually typical of non-power college football programs. Whatever success that gets incrementally built is squandered with the next regime. You can probably find exceptions to that in Wyoming's history but what I'm describing is waaaaay more prevalent.

I'm just lost in the argument. If we don't suck, what is the purpose of worrying about sucking in the future. Let's cross that bridge if and when it comes.

I'm not really arguing a point... I'm just making the observation that (as you pointed out) when wyoming has had a coach hired away, it is because there has been some success to hire him away from. And then, once that happens, historically, the program has "reverted to the mean" so to speak. I think we all accept that this is the nature of the beast.... And we know that the answer is to make another good hire. But making the next good hire is the product of a process that does not seem to be in place at wyoming....So as much as I enjoy the success that comes before getting our coaches hired away from us....I do not relish what has inevitably come next.

Does that make any sense?

We could be so lucky. Let’s win first.

 

[OrediggerPoke]

If he has one or two good years, he's gone to a p5 team again.

Or maybe Bohl hangs it up and he becomes Wyoming's head coach. Bohl won't be coaching very many more years. Vigen was slated to be the guy in waiting but it became apparent that he had very little chance for that (so he went to Montana State and Bohl did not have to part ways with his friend).

Even if that were to happen...the overall perceived talent on the Wyoming coaching staff will not increase or even stay steady as long as we have a successful season or seasons. If he's great...It will be noticed and he'll get poached.

Steady program improvement seems pretty impossible given that improvement past a certain point results in a talent exodus from the staff which will stall or reverse the improvement.

I want to be be more excited about the program but I just don't see a realistic path to sustained success. It seems like the best we can hope for is a spike of success...and that spike seems to be not very high anymore.

I'll be happy if other programs want our coaches. It will mean that we didn't suck. Wyoming (just the same as every other G5 program) is never going to be able to retain successful coaches. The key is to continually bring in young coaches so they are ready to step up and fill the void when other coaches are poached.

You are right...it means we didn't suck. However...In the history of success at Wyoming it also means that we are going to suck. Success has not been built upon at Wyoming. This is actually typical of non-power college football programs. Whatever success that gets incrementally built is squandered with the next regime. You can probably find exceptions to that in Wyoming's history but what I'm describing is waaaaay more prevalent.

I'm just lost in the argument. If we don't suck, what is the purpose of worrying about sucking in the future. Let's cross that bridge if and when it comes.

I'm not really arguing a point... I'm just making the observation that (as you pointed out) when wyoming has had a coach hired away, it is because there has been some success to hire him away from. And then, once that happens, historically, the program has "reverted to the mean" so to speak. I think we all accept that this is the nature of the beast.... And we know that the answer is to make another good hire. But making the next good hire is the product of a process that does not seem to be in place at wyoming....So as much as I enjoy the success that comes before getting our coaches hired away from us....I do not relish what has inevitably come next.

Does that make any sense?

We could be so lucky. Let’s win first.

Yea, I agree with this.

The whole argument reminds me of that fan in major league. When the Indians start to play good, rather than simply enjoy the moment, he is like they will blow it in the 9th or they will blow it next game.

 

[307bball]

The whole argument reminds me of that fan in major league. When the Indians start to play good, rather than simply enjoy the moment, he is like they will blow it in the 9th or they will blow it next game.

Again... I'm not arguing... This is merely observation. Historically speaking, when a coach at wyoming has success and gets hired away, the program goes down... Not up. For the record, I feel like this situation at OC is a strict upgrade. I also happen to be a fan of craig Bohl and am excited at the prospect of a change in coordinator. I'm just skeptical that wyoming will be making a jump in competitiveness in the long term. I really don't see a path to the kind of program that dominates the conference for multiple years. In the current mwc, it's sdsu and bsu and the rest. Maybe this is a reverse jinx of some sort. I've been predicting success in every season since koenning left. Maybe I'll continue to be wrong and wyoming will become the class of the conference for the next five years.

As far as enjoying the moment... I'll be doing plenty of that once we have a real season again and something to cheer about.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

We've done alright with D coordinator changes after we got rid of the bad one.

Pretty simple, if you aren't having coordinator or position coaching changes (due to coaches moving up), you aren't having success. Coaching changes (moving up not getting fired) come with success.

There is a 0% chance of putting together a winning program while sustaining position coaches and coordinators. Not ever going to happen. What hopefully happens is that these coaches move on to better and better jobs making WYO look like an excellent coaching incubator.

I'm excited. The only thing holding this program back has been the offense.

 

[307bball]

Hmmm interesting responses. I think it is safe to draw a few general conclusions:

Good programs will have high turnover due to coaches getting hired away by better opportunities.
Bad programs will have high turnover due to administration trying to become good programs.

If both of those are true statements then coaching turnover, by itself, is not what separates good programs from bad ones. Maybe we can separate the FBS into three tiers when it comes to turnover.

Tier 1: Teams that are elite and have turnover almost exclusively due to rising stars moving on to better opportunities.
Tier 2: Teams that are up and down, and when they are up...the coaches get hired away by bigger opportunities. When they are down, coaches get let go for performance related reasons.
Tier 3: Teams that are rarely competitive, and have turnover almost exclusively due to poor performance.

All three tiers will have about the same amount of coaching turnover...I would imagine the top tier will have high stability at HC and lots of churn at the coordinator and position coach level though. If you find yourself as a fan of a team in the second tier...it's very frustrating because when the success comes, inevitably there will be movement of the coaches that brought that success away from your program. Something about that type of turnover seems really tough for teams in that second tier.

 

[Old-Bull]

I just watched a video on Pulasek from his Iowa days where he was talking about recruiting. For Iowa he recruited Wisconsin. I think he has a lot of experience in Minnesota as well. According to the video, he dabbled in the Chicago area for a while. Here, this is easier....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1A_7TUiCoTw

My question is this: where did Vigen recruit? Do you guys expect us to recruit the upper midwest more or do we expect Tim to recruit in different areas then his strengths? It seems like Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Chicago are areas that we might be able to pull some talent from.

 

[fromolwyoming]

Vigen specifically? Not sure. But overall, we have recruited the area a number of times. Eric Abojei, for example, is from Minnesota and Garret Crall is from Ohio. And several more from the Upper Midwest are on roster/have been on the team (Brian Hill was from Illinois).

 

[Old-Bull]

Vigen specifically? Not sure. But overall, we have recruited the area a number of times. Eric Abojei, for example, is from Minnesota and Garret Crall is from Ohio. And several more from the Upper Midwest are on roster/have been on the team (Brian Hill was from Illinois).

You would think that would be an area we could have success recruiting. If hunting season is any indication, Wisconsin residents love coming out west.

Frazier seems like a pretty solid fit for the area with all his local ties. Vigan was from the North Dakota tree so you would think Polasek is a like for like replacement when it comes to areas he's familiar recruiting.